I would just like to share a personal experience of mine.

I have a cousin who has Cerebral palsy, he's 18 years old already, he cannot talk but just uttered sounds, he cannot walk appropriately without the help of someone, much bigger than him. Growing up, i could see the "differences" between him and us.

His family raised him normally together with his other 4 siblings. Sometimes we can't help but favor him because of his condition. Nonetheless, my cousins weren't envy of him, because they know he was special-- that inspite of all the love they could give, they knew it was not enough.

I observed my tito and tita treated them equally, that if my special cousin did something bad, they will talk to him, tell him that it is wrong. Just like how they would react whenever the other siblings did something also.

I think, it's a matter of understanding and acceptance.

Before giving your insights, i would like to give you a bit of information that will give you an idea about our first issue.


John Rawls is widely regarded as one of the most important political philosophers of the second half of the twentieth century. He is primarily known for his theory of justice as fairness, which develops principles of justice to govern a modern social order. Rawls' theory provides a framework that explains the significance, in a society assumed to consist of free and equal persons, of political and personal liberties, of equal opportunity, and cooperative arrangements that benefit the more and the less advantaged members of society.

Rawls argues that self-interested rational persons behind the veil of ignorance would choose two general principles of justice to structure society in the real world:

1) Principle of Equal Liberty: Each person has an equal right to the most extensive liberties compatible with similar liberties for all. (Egalitarian.)

2) Difference Principle: Social and economic inequalities should be arranged so that they are both (a) to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged persons, and (b) attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of equality of opportunity.

http://www.wku.edu/~jan.garrett/ethics/matrawls.htm

Good evening classmates: I'm Thea and I will be the first moderator for tonight. Tonight's discussion will be about our different ethical as well as moral stand as nurse practitioners. I think this will be a fruitful discussion just like our previous nights.

Same rules apply. Enjoy!

here is the First Moral Issue:

1. In Rawl’s view, justice is fairness, e.g., “to each his due” (Gustafson, James M. 1987. Mongolism, Parental Desires, and the Right to Life. Bioethics. Third edition. New Jersey: Paulist Press).


Questions to ponder:

1. Would it be “fair” to raise a severely deformed baby with the other children in the family?

2. Would the other children get what is due them alongside the inordinate requirements of time, energy, and financial resources that would be required to raise or save the severely malformed child?

3. Or, if the other children did receive what is due them, would there be sufficient time, energy and other resources to attend to the particular (nay, special) needs of the deformed child? Discuss your views among your classmates.

If you CAN support your stand with literatures. Kindly post the references.